3 ms·
Is there anything that isn't "observed"? Are you suggesting that everything except formal logic (or perhaps including?) cannot be objectively characterized? Hav
by atdt 10y ago
Is there anything that isn't "observed"? Are you suggesting that everything except formal logic (or perhaps including?) cannot be objectively characterized? Have we been awarding the Nobel prize in Chemistry to too many chemists, while failing to recognize the emotional-social validity of alchemy?
- thanatropism 10y agoWelp, a proposition in chemistry is cleanly falsifiable, so we can gradually (as we have historically) delimit "chemistry proper" from what we could call the general phenomenology of matter. Of course, taken to a metaphysical limit, it's not even the case that things are embedded in a context, but that they're the context itself (as Derrida famously put), but this is completely irrelevant to chemistry. I don't believe this is the case with psychology or linguistics. Of course, I could be wrong; in particular, they may work as "applied pseudosciences" (much like economics, which is really useful) even though we will never arrive at their foundations. EDIT: More succintly put: the objects of interest of chemistry always arrived as abstracted from context, while the objects of linguistics and psychology are the context themselves.